I've had to do a little interpretation here because the symbology of the papers I've used is mixed up, but for POc I'll be using the Blust transcription and for PMic I'll be using a sort of ad-hoc representation and just explaining what the symbols are supposed to mean according to the authors afterwards.

t' was probably a retroflex obstruent of some kind (given the devoicing of other prenasalized stops, probably an unvoiced stop)x is a little mysterious, I don't think it's meant to be IPA [x], because it has a slightly odd set of reflexes in Micronesian: 0, k, or r.

PMic now has:

p pw t t' c j km mw n ñ ŋf s xw l rProto Micronesian to Chuukese

ñ l > n nt' > tʂx j > 0 0s > t̪t > s/_at > 0k > s/_{i, u} (apparently doesn't happen all the time?)k > 0 (only if it's not adjacent to a high vowel)ŋ > n/_i (sometimes)t̪ > tc > t/_a (and > s everywhere else)in between homorganic or identical phonemes, unstressed vowels were lost, forming geminates. this gives chuukese the illustrious honor of being one of the few languages to have geminates *initially*.there seems to have been some glide insertion in between vowels and word initially, but I can't make any consistent headway on this phenomenon. for instance, the reflex of *topu 'sugarcane' is not the expected oow, but instead it is woow.

Obviously there are vowel changes in Marshallese, but they were not elaborated on very clearly in the literature, except for the dissimilation of low vowels: a > e before a syllable containing *a. Maybe the vowels just lose all distinctive qualities except height?the other change that is apparent is V > 0/_#. This is practically a pan-Micronesian thing.

'j' and 'd' mean /tʲ rʲ/, 'l n' should similarly be read as palatalized in modern marshallese.

Sources for this post and the previous one are Proto Micronesian Reconstructions: I (Bender et al. 2007) and Gradual and Quantum Changes in the History of Chuukese Phonology (Goodenough 1992)

θ ð → {z,h} {z,Ø}j → Ø / V_Vx → {x,h}mː → mnː → n(ː)β̃ → v, while nasalizing at least some preceding segments—not sure if it's just vowels or if consonants are affectedh → x / _wh seems to have been lost sometimes when it developed initially from *s; not sure if that's analogical due to consonant mutation or noth → {x,h} / V_#

Late Brittonic to Cornish

x → hj → Ø / V_Vmː → mnː → n(ː)β̃ → vhw → ʍ

Late Brittonic to Welsh

NB: I'm aware this has been done before but I'm including it anyway; maybe both sets of Welsh changes can be compared against each other and provide corrections, if any

The information in this post is from Fortescue, Michael (2011), Comparative Chukotko-Kamchatkan Dictionary. These rules are probably jumbled up somewhat chronologically and for the most part only deal with consonants.

I'm going to begin with a note on an alternation that possibly goes back to Proto-Chukotko-Kamchatkan. The exact environments are somewhat of a conjecture but the rules in general look like this:

TONESBasically, if I'm reading this right (and Wikipedia is clear as mud; the tone-correspondence table is a nightmare), tone 1 = Ping, tone 2 = Shang, tone 3 = Qu. Ru basically is a Shang syllable with a stop coda (if this is wrong, someone who is more in the know please correct me).

TONESBasically, if I'm reading this right (and Wikipedia is clear as mud; the tone-correspondence table is a nightmare), tone 1 = Ping, tone 2 = Shang, tone 3 = Qu. Ru basically is a Shang syllable with a stop coda (if this is wrong, someone who is more in the know please correct me).

Qu syllables are usually considered as having a separate "tone" altogether, a 4th "tone".

Quote:

Ru → Ru (whatever) / O[- voice]_

I think it would be clearer to write "Ru → (any tone at random) / O[- voice]_"?

For tones, I follow the Wikipedia article's convention: The shorthand T D N refers to onsets of voiceless obstruents, voiced obstruents, and resonants, regardless of the place of articulation; NT and ND refer to the prenasalized ("softened") stops. *z *ɣ belong with the Nʰ/Dʰ group; *ʒ, with the D group; and *ɦ, with the ND group. Tones *A, *B, and *C occured on syllables that did not end in a stop. Tone *D only occurred on syllables that ended in a stop. There is probably a lot of information missing from the article.

[EDIT: OriginallyI had sound changes from Old Chinese to Proto-Min here but I think they were highly incorrect and so I have removed them.]

Someone called "chridd" or "chri d. d." has made a searchable version of the Index Diachronica in both online and Unicode PDF form. I plan on releasing v.11.0 sometime this week (if possible; I have just started a new job) and plan to render it in XeLaTeX to make it Unicode-searchable from the get-go.

Note that a new, full reconstruction of Old Chinese was published in 2014, and OU's library just got a copy- Old Chinese-:A New Reconstruction by Baxter and Sagart. Doesn't seem to be cited anywhere on Wikipedia, but I checked it out out of curiosity and I'll see what I can do with it in the nearish future.

*x̣, written here with an underdot because the ZBB can't seem to differentiate <χ> and <x> in its font, is posited due to some not entirely regular correspondences that would otherwise have a reconstructed *x.

The vocalic system of Proto-Yuman is still not entirely understood, but it is thought to have been the standard five-vowel /a e i o u/, with phonemic length and stress. Wares does not go too deeply into the question of comparative vocalism, but does provide some correspondences for stressed vowels (and those only).

Wares classifies the Yuman languages into four groups based on phonological isoglosses:

a) The Northern Yuman group consists of Walapai, Havasupai, Yavapai, and Paipai, the first three of which form a subgroup, also confusingly called Northern Yuman; Paipai is spoken about three hundred miles from the others, but there are good reasons to believe they form a group, such as the split of *v to /w/ before a stressed syllable and /v/ after it and the merger of *l and *lʲ as /l/. To distinguish, we'll call Walapai+Havasupai+Yavapai 'Northern Yuman', with 'Macro-Northern Yuman' for the sum of Northern Yuman and Paipai.

b) Central Yuman, consisting of Mohave, Maricopa and Yuma, is distinguished from the rest of the family by a shared innovation of *j to /ð/ in pre-stressed position; it is also the only branch where *v does not undergo a stress-based split.

c) The Delta-California group, consisting of Cocopa, Diegueño, and Tipai, are distinguished by the split of *v to /w/ before the stress and /p/ after it, as well as retention of *ʈ, which merges with *t elsewhere. They have also undergone a shift of *lʲ to /ɬ/.

d) Kiliwa is the fourth branch, consisting of a single language. It's the black sheep of the family: it has an additional aspirated series of stops, sometimes corresponding to stop-sibilant clusters elsewhere (e.g. Kiliwa pʰáʔ 'belly', Tipai pxá 'intestines'), but not usually. Kiliwa's become much better studied since Wares' monograph, which was published in 1968, so...someone's research topic? Otherwise, Kiliwa is notable for a shift of *r to /ɣ/, and sharing the Delta-California treatment of *v.

As a reminder, none of these are intended to be exhaustive, and if I were in the mood to get a bunch of dictionaries together and spend a few months with them, I could probably make some decent rewrites to the article. But, I'm not, so here you are.

Does anyone have Common Slavic > Czech? Or can point to relevant reading to find out. I never did the module on Historical Linguistics at uni so I don't really know where to go to find lists of sound changes.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 1 guest

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum